The High Court has refused to appoint Fair Trials Europe as an amicus curiae in proceedings concerning Artur Celmer’s proposed surrender to Poland under three European Arrest Warrants.
Ms Justice Donnelly gave the ruling on 23 March 2018. The application was made while the court was considering questions to refer to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The court had decided on 12 March that a reference was necessary and had said it would seek the CJEU’s urgent procedure. Celmer was in custody.
Fair Trials Europe sought permission to assist with the formulation of the proposed questions, including on EU law, fair trial rights, judicial independence and the operation of the European Arrest Warrant. The Minister for Justice and Equality opposed the application. Celmer took no position on it, although his counsel later commented on the Minister’s submissions.
The judge said the central question was whether the proposed intervention was likely to assist the High Court significantly. She held that appointing an amicus solely to make representations to the CJEU would not be a proper exercise of the High Court’s discretion: the role must assist the High Court in its own determination.
The application was not limited to that purpose. Fair Trials Europe also wished to make submissions on the questions the High Court would refer. But the judge described the intervention as coming at a late stage, after the court had determined the issues raised and both parties had been invited to comment on the proposed questions. Allowing the application would require further court time to decide whether Fair Trials Europe’s proposed issues arose from the arguments and judgment, which the judge said weighed strongly against it given the urgency of the case.
The judge was also not satisfied that the organisation would add a perspective not already provided, or available from, the parties, who were represented by senior and junior counsel and solicitors. She acknowledged Fair Trials Europe’s role in civil society and its focus on cross-border fair trial issues, but concluded that the court should not exercise its discretion to join it.
The ruling concerns only the application to participate as an amicus curiae. It does not determine the surrender proceedings or the questions ultimately referred to the CJEU.